path: root/Documentation/stable_kernel_rules.txt
diff options
authorAnton Arapov <>2012-04-16 10:05:28 +0200
committerAnton Arapov <>2012-04-16 10:05:28 +0200
commitb4b6116a13633898cf868f2f103c96a90c4c20f8 (patch)
tree93d1b7e2cfcdf473d8d4ff3ad141fa864f8491f6 /Documentation/stable_kernel_rules.txt
parentedd4be777c953e5faafc80d091d3084b4343f5d3 (diff)
fedora kernel: d9aad82f3319f3cfd1aebc01234254ef0c37ad84v3.3.2-1
Signed-off-by: Anton Arapov <>
Diffstat (limited to 'Documentation/stable_kernel_rules.txt')
1 files changed, 80 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/Documentation/stable_kernel_rules.txt b/Documentation/stable_kernel_rules.txt
new file mode 100644
index 00000000000..f0ab5cf28fc
--- /dev/null
+++ b/Documentation/stable_kernel_rules.txt
@@ -0,0 +1,80 @@
+Everything you ever wanted to know about Linux 2.6 -stable releases.
+Rules on what kind of patches are accepted, and which ones are not, into the
+"-stable" tree:
+ - It must be obviously correct and tested.
+ - It cannot be bigger than 100 lines, with context.
+ - It must fix only one thing.
+ - It must fix a real bug that bothers people (not a, "This could be a
+ problem..." type thing).
+ - It must fix a problem that causes a build error (but not for things
+ marked CONFIG_BROKEN), an oops, a hang, data corruption, a real
+ security issue, or some "oh, that's not good" issue. In short, something
+ critical.
+ - New device IDs and quirks are also accepted.
+ - No "theoretical race condition" issues, unless an explanation of how the
+ race can be exploited is also provided.
+ - It cannot contain any "trivial" fixes in it (spelling changes,
+ whitespace cleanups, etc).
+ - It must follow the Documentation/SubmittingPatches rules.
+ - It or an equivalent fix must already exist in Linus' tree (upstream).
+Procedure for submitting patches to the -stable tree:
+ - Send the patch, after verifying that it follows the above rules, to
+ You must note the upstream commit ID in the
+ changelog of your submission, as well as the kernel version you wish
+ it to be applied to.
+ - To have the patch automatically included in the stable tree, add the tag
+ Cc:
+ in the sign-off area. Once the patch is merged it will be applied to
+ the stable tree without anything else needing to be done by the author
+ or subsystem maintainer.
+ - If the patch requires other patches as prerequisites which can be
+ cherry-picked than this can be specified in the following format in
+ the sign-off area:
+ Cc: <> # .32.x: a1f84a3: sched: Check for idle
+ Cc: <> # .32.x: 1b9508f: sched: Rate-limit newidle
+ Cc: <> # .32.x: fd21073: sched: Fix affinity logic
+ Cc: <> # .32.x
+ Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <>
+ The tag sequence has the meaning of:
+ git cherry-pick a1f84a3
+ git cherry-pick 1b9508f
+ git cherry-pick fd21073
+ git cherry-pick <this commit>
+ - The sender will receive an ACK when the patch has been accepted into the
+ queue, or a NAK if the patch is rejected. This response might take a few
+ days, according to the developer's schedules.
+ - If accepted, the patch will be added to the -stable queue, for review by
+ other developers and by the relevant subsystem maintainer.
+ - Security patches should not be sent to this alias, but instead to the
+ documented address.
+Review cycle:
+ - When the -stable maintainers decide for a review cycle, the patches will be
+ sent to the review committee, and the maintainer of the affected area of
+ the patch (unless the submitter is the maintainer of the area) and CC: to
+ the linux-kernel mailing list.
+ - The review committee has 48 hours in which to ACK or NAK the patch.
+ - If the patch is rejected by a member of the committee, or linux-kernel
+ members object to the patch, bringing up issues that the maintainers and
+ members did not realize, the patch will be dropped from the queue.
+ - At the end of the review cycle, the ACKed patches will be added to the
+ latest -stable release, and a new -stable release will happen.
+ - Security patches will be accepted into the -stable tree directly from the
+ security kernel team, and not go through the normal review cycle.
+ Contact the kernel security team for more details on this procedure.
+Review committee:
+ - This is made up of a number of kernel developers who have volunteered for
+ this task, and a few that haven't.